Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Chapman

Citations

  • 433 Mass. 481
  • 744 N.E.2d 14
  • 2001 Mass. LEXIS 167

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • interpreting “substantial bodily injury” as used in G. L. c. 265, § 13J[a]
  • interpreting \substantial bodily injury\ as used in G. L. c. 265, § 13J[a]
  • “The defendant’s contention that her acts and omissions were themselves accidents was a question for the jury”
  • vagueness challenge rejected where defendant was prosecuted for intentional acts and omissions that permitted infant to be placed at risk of such injury
  • jury instructions \must be construed as a whole\ and not as isolated statements [citation omitted]
  • malnutrition or dehydration may cause a “substantial impairment of the physical condition” for purposes of § 13J

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Spina

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

16 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

21 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.